|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-08-05 | | MUG: This opening can also be reached via the Scandinavian Defence: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.d4 cxd5 5.Nc3 e6.
This is important to know if you are a 2...Nf6 Scandinavian player because if White plays to hang onto the pawn with 3.c4 then Black really only has two sensible options: 3...c6 (the solid Panov-Botvinnik), or 3...e6 (the very double-edged Icelandic Gambit). Thanks <hintza>! ;-) |
|
| Jul-20-05 | | Greginctw: why wouldnt white just play dxc6? isnt he up a pawn then? (to mug in his scandinavian transposition line) |
|
| Jul-20-05 | | foolishmovesss: --Greginctw--
I play the Scandinavian against e4 in every e4 game I play. I also follow up with Nf6 if they take the pawn(I just dont see the point of moving my queen around and letting white develop quickly). The pawn that black loses in the c6 line cleary gives the opportunity to equalise the game quickly because of piece development (i.e. piece activity). It is a book move and I would recomended it to be played against any white player attempting to hold the pawn with c4. |
|
Jul-20-05
 | | Eric Schiller: Black has many defenses against the PB Attack, and most lead to an equal game. I enjoy playing both sides of this opening. It is much less dependent on theory than most of the main lines, and a lot of dynamic lines are available. I think the most interesting lines are in the 5...g6 line, where Black temporarily sacrifices the pawn at d5. |
|
| Jul-20-05 | | foolishmovesss: Eric
How do you feel about the line I mentioned with black playing c6 in the scandinavian? Just curious since you know so much about openings, what your take is on the line. Thanks. |
|
| Jul-20-05 | | refutor: i dunno eric the ...g6 lines (statistically and practically) are better for white. maybe not better, but easier to play. i could give many examples of black sacrificing the pawn at d5 and suffering the rest of the game. one example is Tal vs Botvinnik, 1966 my choice is to play ...e6 and aim for a tranposition into a nimzo with ...b6 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System (e54) |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | who: <An Englishman: > What game are you talking about. In game 15 Alekhine crushes Sultan Khan and ends up up a piece. If you mean on move 20...Bxc6 21.Qxe6+ and wins the piece back with a pawn. |
|
Aug-07-05
| | Eric Schiller: <foolish> I have long been a fan of the Scandinavian with ...c6, but with the Queen at d6. In fact, i sometimes play 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5!? if I'm not in the mood for a main line Panov. <refutor> I don't agree that the 5...g6 lines are easier to play for White. For Black it is a simple matter of recouping the pawn at a proper time. The strategy is straightforward. I find the Nimzoindian lines to be more complex strategically, and though the positions are solid, those are a bit easier for White to play. |
|
| Aug-09-05 | | refutor: interesting opinion on the ..g6 line. i'm curious about the transposition into the scandinavian after 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 Qxd4 4.Nc3 Qd6 looks interesting |
|
| Sep-11-05 | | niemzo: <An Englishman> <who> The numbers of the games change over time. Maybe because more old games are inserted into the database, so dont refer to games with these numbers or confusion like here will be created. |
|
| Nov-17-05 | | Kriegspiel: I don't understand why a number of these opening diagrams are incomplete. Where is the Black pawn which is supposed to be at e6? Kriegspiel
|
|
| Nov-20-05 | | Kriegspiel: <refutor: the diagram is correct, but the text for the diagram is not :) B14 includes both 5. ... e6 and 5. ... g6 while 5. ... Nc6 is in B13> <chessgames.com: Thanks, refutor. It appears correct now.> I'm confused. If Black's fifth move can be one of two options, why does the text still show 5...e6? Shouldn't it either be omitted or else two options be shown? Kriegspiel
|
|
| Nov-20-05 | | Kriegspiel: <MUG> Here's just such a transposition (from the Scandinavian into B14): A Fulton vs P Khetho, 2004
Do you think it should be classified under B14 (as it is) opening 1.e4 d5 (as it does)? Also, this game is textually described as "Caro-Kann Defense: Panov Attack. Modern Defense Mieses Line." What does "Modern Defense Mieses Line" refer to there? How can it be both Caro-Kann Defense and Modern Defense? And what is the Mieses Line? Kriegspiel
|
|
Nov-20-05
| | Eric Schiller: <kriegspiel> The ECO code system is badly implemented and causes a lot of problems like this. As for the names, they are hierarchical, so it is perfectly OK to have a "Modern Defense" or "Modern Variation" of the Panov. Names are much better than ECO codes for classifying and Chessgames is working to implement a named opening classification. |
|
| Nov-20-05 | | Kriegspiel: <Eric Schiller> I just think of the Modern Defense as a completely different opening (e.g., A42). Also, doesn't the word "Defense" in both "Caro-Kann Defense" and "Modern Defense Mieses Line" refer to Black's portion of play here? So how can it be both? And what is the Mieses Line? Thanks,
Kriegspiel
|
|
| Dec-08-05 | | popski: This is somehow strange opening. I think you need good nerves for this. First you isolate your own pawn and after you don't have a feeling that you have some kind of initiative... First four moves looks so promising, but after everything start to melt and you have to watch on your own annoying isolated pawn all the time, because if you lost this one, you are in a big trouble. It's also hard to find weak points in a black position after casteling. I don't feel comfortable with this opening... |
|
Dec-08-05
| | Eric Schiller: <Kriegspiel> The name of an opening refers to the position of the board, independent of color. By convention, most Defenses are Black openings, but the word "Attack" is used for both sides. The names are a hierarchy, just as in biology there are groups and subgroups, each of which has a name. |
|
Dec-08-05
| | Eric Schiller: <popski> You seem to think isolated pawns are a bad thing. Tarrasch and many others have proven otherwise. Having an IQP means having plenty of mobility for pieces, and wide open attacking files. I play both sides of IQP positions, but prefer to have the isolated pawn, as in the Tarrasch Defense. |
|
Dec-08-05
 | | WannaBe: have to try this out next time <sueteus po 147> brings out the CK opening. =) |
|
| Dec-09-05 | | suenteus po 147: <WannaBe> I've had some good experience with the Panov-Botvinnik as black. In fact, I'm undefeated in it. Of course years of experience playing the QGD has helped, I think. |
|
| Dec-09-05 | | Averageguy: Hello, I was wondering as an aggressive player who dislikes opening theory which line is more for me as white, the main-line Caro-Kann or the Panov-Botvinnik attack? |
|
Dec-09-05
 | | Gypsy: <Averageguy> Panov. The feel of that is similar to lots of other IQP positions. And attacking players find the main-line quite anoying. |
|
| Dec-09-05 | | Averageguy: <Gypsy> Thanks for your reccomendation, I'll give it a go. However, I don't really agree that aggresive players get annoyed with the main-line. I've won some good games with it (best was a win against my 1988 rated club champ). |
|
Dec-09-05
| | Gypsy: <Averageguy> If you are an attacking player, how can you go wrong following Alekhine (or Tal). Good luck! As for the main-line: My father played CK all his life to the great chagrin of his club- and tournament buddies. I am glad to hear that the main-line does not get under your skin; many an 1.e4 attacking player groans quietly when consenting to enter it for the umpteenth time. |
|
| Dec-09-05 | | Akavall: Funny, but I think exchange variation of Caro-Kann gives white a pretty good attack. While black has to move pawns on the Queen's side, white just sets up an attack. It is definitly good for someone who doesn't like theory. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
